Posted
by
Unknown Lamer
on Wednesday February 26, 2014 @12:46PM
from the elon-musk-hungers-for-power dept.

cartechboy writes "We've heard about Tesla building this new gigafactory to produce battery packs for its electric cars. Heck, the company's current bottleneck is its ability to get battery packs for its electric cars. In fact, last year Tesla used a bit more than one-third of the auto industry's electric-car batteries, and that was with only selling 22,477 cars last year. Tesla is expanding its model lineup as quickly as possible with the introduction of the Model X crossover next year and a compact sports sedan in 2017. With the rapid expansion of its vehicle line, Tesla is going to need a crazy amount of battery packs, and quickly. Thus, the Silicon Valley upstart is building the gigafactory to engineer and produce battery packs in much larger quantities. If Tesla can remove the battery production bottle neck it's currently facing, the only question left will be market acceptance of a mainstream electric car."

At current projected usage, Tesla is threatening to use up all the supply of batteries by 2016, and then there'll be trouble. I foresee a US invasion of Fremont in the near future as mayor Gus Morrisson continues to engage in belligerent talk and saber rattling related to commercial zone redistricting and increased parking fines. Rumors still abound regarding the untimely demise of his predecessor Bob Wasserman. Was it pneumonia, or something far more sinister?

Yep, and since everybody knows it is impossible to manufacture more batteries to meet demand, this will be a disaster. It's just the laws of nature man, you can't manufacture enough batteries to last until 2016, elementary chaos theory.

the only question left will be market acceptance of a mainstream electric car

No, I do not think that is even an unanswered question at this point. The biggest question I have is, will there be a STANDARD connector for quick charging batteries so that after driving 200 miles, can we re-charge the batteries in a few minutes no matter what brand of car we're driving?

Right now, the ONLY thing that is preventing me from getting a Tesla is that I have to travel longer than 500 miles a few times a year, and renting a car for a week, three times a year is too expensive an option.

Right now, the ONLY thing that is preventing me from getting a Tesla is that I have to travel longer than 500 miles a few times a year, and renting a car for a week, three times a year is too expensive an option.

However, I do see the possibility of all this changing how we travel. Especially if the Autonomous automobile becomes a reality. This would allow people to travel by train / airplane and "rent" a vehicle only for getting to / from transportation hubs and local travel.

That is a whole lot of stupidity in one sentence. Even disregarding the fact that you are talking about a $60k car, renting a car for a week costs, what, let's say $300 cause you want a nice car. So $900 dollars a year. How much do you spend in gas in a year?

It's a rhetorical question since your math skills are clearly not up to simple addition.

"Right now, the ONLY thing that is preventing me from getting a Tesla is that I have to travel longer than 500 miles a few times a year, and renting a car for a week, three times a year is too expensive an option."

Renting a car for $500/pop three times a year is "too expensive" for a guy who has no problem dropping $90,000 on a car? I could see that the inconvenience might be a reason, but cost? We rented a mini-van a couple times a year for our family vacations because the sedan wasn't big enough. NBD.

We rented a mini-van a couple times a year for our family vacations because the sedan wasn't big enough.

Why? The cost difference between a family sedan and a minivan plus the small additional cost of fuel is less than renting a minivan one week a year, let alone multiple weeks. I know, I've done the numbers and while I'd like to get my wife a more fuel efficient vehicle for her next one it makes zero economic sense when we take 2-3 weeks of long distance trips (we've been to 38 states so far, most by car).

Right now, the ONLY thing that is preventing me from getting a Tesla is that I have to travel longer than 500 miles a few times a year, and renting a car for a week, three times a year is too expensive an option

Odd.

I'm a pretty firm believer that if you're going to drive 500 miles, renting a car is almost always a better option in terms of the wear and tear on your own car. [Obviously if you're leasing and under your mileage quota, things change, etc. etc.] I suppose it breaks down to what a week is (3-5 days? 7-10 days?) and how far longer than 500 is. Car rentals for non-luxury vehicles, especially for anyone who rents regularly are easily had in the sub-$40 range. Econoboxes are cheaper, but rarely enough cheaper to justify. On a whim, with no notice or club status, It's $44 a day for me to pick up a "mid-size" or "intermediate" (Sentra, Corolla, Fusion, Malabu) right now in my town.

At $334 a week, if you're only driving 500 miles, you're probably not ahead.

But 5 days and 600 miles -- Those 37c/mile probably come out ahead nicely with actual wear and tear on your car. AAA thinks so. *shrug*

Even if it's only a small loss over driving your own car (in terms of big picture wear and tear), it might be overall worth it after switching to a Tesla.

I have a Mercury Grand Marquis that I paid 1700 for two years ago, bought tires and serpentine belt for. It has 90K miles on it now. I recently replaced the brakes myself (simple job). In total, I've spent less than $2500 for two years of driving (plus gass). Nice ride, mechanically sound engine/tranny but it does have its issues with the automatic windows. It is a very nice ride.

My last vehicle was bought brand new for about $20k, lasted 20 years before it just fell apart. I put in about $2000 on that veh

Right now, the ONLY thing that is preventing me from getting a Tesla is that I have to travel longer than 500 miles a few times a year, and renting a car for a week, three times a year is too expensive an option

OK, so the serious answer is that in a decade, when someone wants to get rid of their Tesla and get the latest model, you will look at it, and decide that since you still have to occasionally rent a car a couple times a year, that you will have to spend more than $1000 per year on it and so therefore you are not interested.

I understand wanting to save money on the car, but that still doesn't bring a $90k vehicle down into the $1k per year range. On the other hand, for the last several years, I have deducted

Part of the Tesla's magic is a USB connection where you'd expect an ODB2 port.

My Leaf, at least, still has an ODB2 connector, and I can read the individual battery values with my $12 bluetooth ODB2 dongle and my phone.

That said, I wonder how they do vehicle "emissions" testings. Here in Arizona, you just pull up, the plug in by ODB2, make sure you don't have faults, and send you on their way. [I'm sure there's a process. I just wonder what it is.]

. The biggest question I have is, will there be a STANDARD connector for quick charging batteries so that after driving 200 miles, can we re-charge the batteries in a few minutes no matter what brand of car we're driving?

Why do people keep harping on this? This was the top rated comment last time a Tesla was mentions as well. Is it really that hard to go to Tesla's website and click on "charging"? The Tesla comes with a couple of standard plugs, including the common SAE plug. https://en.wikipedia.org/wik [wikipedia.org]

You get yours back on the return trip (this is not optional). Like you'd have known, if you'd done any research instead of running your gob off. If you're returning via a different route, don't use the swap stations unless you're willing to head back to them shortly afterward.

Also, I'm pretty sure they would test the batteries before swapping them into a car. It's not as if this is difficult, or as if they have any vested interest in giving you bad batteries. I know it's probably very unusual and painful to

Actually, most GDP is produced on the East Coast. New York [wikipedia.org] rules the roost, producing almost as much GDP as LA, SF, and Seattle combined. And the high-tech cities of SF, Seattle, and San Jose combined don't even add up to 60% of NYC's GDP.

Comparing GDP per capita, Washington DC is number 1, just barely beating out SF, and Boston beats out Seattle. NYC rounds out the top 5, and the next West Coast city, LA, is barely in the top 10, with less GDP per capita than Philly.

That is GDP per capita [wikipedia.org], where the east coast still wins in any comparison. It was addressed in my second paragraph, but I'll repeat it here:

Comparing GDP per capita, Washington DC is number 1, just barely beating out SF, and Boston beats out Seattle. NYC rounds out the top 5, and the next West Coast city, LA, is barely in the top 10, with less GDP per capita than Philly.

No, the real question(s) left are - can you make it affordable and can you accelerate and standardize recharging, because most people out there wouldn't care if their cars ran on donkey shit if it was affordable, quiet, efficient, and you could "fill up" whenever and wherever you needed to.

Of course, charging with 110 is a slow process. A Tesla requires a bit more juice than your smartphone, but it's still an option for overnight. Especially if you're not maxing out the distance every day. The recommended 240 plug is the same thing you've probably got running to your dryer (NEMA 14-50) so still pretty standardized.

Charging from an american husehold outlet is about the same as charging your phone with a small windmill driven by you blowing on it.

110V * 12A makes for a very pitiful 1.320W. I've seen hair dryers that sucked more power than that.

I believe they said something like 14 hours for a full charge (sure, you'd rarely need a full charge) from a 220V * 16A outlet, so you can imagine how painful the experience would be at half the voltage and a lower current.

nope.
The leaf is really only suitable for areas like all of Japan, and most of mid europe and America. Otherwise, it gets too hot or too cold. The leaf does NOT deal with thermal issues, so they have serious battery issues.

I have a Leaf, there is no radiator of any kind. Heat comes from resistance (pre 2013) or heat pump (2013 and beyond).

Heat pumps still require radiators. They are much simpler and less maintenance then a typical automotive radiator - but they are still there. Just look at the back / bottom of your refrigerator for an example.

When I take my Focus Electric in for scheduled maintenance, it's amusing to watch the service rep trying to find something they can actually do. So far the only items have been tire rotation and software updates.

The mechanical brakes get less use because of regenerative breaking, but they still need fluid and pads occasionally. But besides those two things, I want to say that the only other scheduled maintenance in the first 10 years is cabin air filters- which you can easily do at home.

I've been in (several) taxi Prius with over 400,000 km on the clock. These cars spend most of their life on battery mode so they (likely, perhaps) get as intense a battery workout as the Tesla. The average car is kept 3 years. Unless you plan to keep it ten + years, is this really a concern?

What is this based on? The electric range of a Prius plugin [wikipedia.org] is less than 23 Km. I was a taxi driver and drove upwards of 300 km/ day. Most of the electricity used during the day is from regenerative braking but there is still a lot of gasoline used.

The average car is kept 3 years by the original owner.

FTFY. After that cars go on the used market and are in service for many more years. I drive a 2002 Hyundai Elantra. Are you advocating trowing away a $100,000 car after 3 years?

scarcity of materials? You are kidding. Right? Lithium is in the top 10 most abundant materials. A new lithium mine was found in Wyoming that has no less than 3/4 million tonnes of lithium. However, they believe that it is actually around 18 million tonnes. And that is just one mine in America. Many others are out there. More importantly, both japan and South Korea are working on how to get it from the ocean. And we have several companies working on seperating it from geo-thermal generators post steam.

There are other fluids as well. The sealed gear box has gear oil (both 1.0 and 1.5 versions.) The batteries, motor/PEM/inverter and cabin are all cooled/heated using antifreeze with the requisite pumps, lines and heat exchangers in three fluid loops. The AC system also has fluid to exchange heat.

Your point is valid and very appealing; electric vehicles have fewer failure modes and maintenance

Tesla absolutely has cooling fluid. In fact, it is the ONLY car maker to properly deal with the cells. And that heat is used to heat the inside of the car.
There is grease, but they are in sealed areas. IOW, they are not expected to wear out.
Brake pads are expected to be changed about every 100K miles. Not bad.

I hear posts like yours a lot. I believe you about your maintenance needs, but its not that big a deal.

The last new car I bought needed no maintenance in the first year except for an oil change or two. My current car I bought 3 years used and it has needed no maintenance except for oil changes, air filters, and wiper blades. Modern ICE cars don't require a lot of work when they are new. Sure you need to change the oil, but I do that myself for about $30.

But once you hit 50K, 75K, 100K, 125K, and 150K, you need 1000's of $ for each time. And if you lose a transmission, or other parts, life is EXPENSIVE. The simple fact is, that ICE cars are complex creatures that will have issues down the road and will costs loads of money.
The only thing worse than a General ICE, is a parallel hybrid. Worst idea going.

A Tesla still has many parts that can be expensive to repair or replace We really need some time to sort out what the true cost to own one is.

It has an electric motor. Those do wear out over time. Unknown how many miles to wear out, and unknown cost. Similarly it has a transmission. A Wikipedia entry indicates its a single speed, so it should last a long time, but mechanical gear boxes do wear over time. There's a large battery pack. I don't know the life span of this, all indications are it is a lon

Brushless AC induction in this case. As long as they used durable chemicals in the windings and relgulate/cool it correctly, I'd expect the chassis to rust out before it needed more than a new set of bearings.

I'd expect the chassis to rust out before it needed more than a new set of bearings.

Given that said chassis is mostly aluminum [scientificamerican.com] that'll be a while...

But then again, I've heard of motors made during Edison's time still being in service, and AC induction motors, properly treated, are about the longest living electric motor as well...

I wonder if we might see a return of reupholstery/interior refurbishment places - rather than replace your Tesla, swap the battery for a new one while you have it repainted, seats replaced, and dash fixed up a bit?

Really? You can have somebody replace your engine at 15 years later, with a brand new engine, AND include all of your regular maintenance for less than $5000K? What car are you driving? I would have thought that it was impossible to get a brand new engine for 2000K, let alone be able to get one. And once you add in all of the BS service calls, I would expect to pay well over 7500 for maintenence, brake pads, brakes, probable transmissions, seals, new engines, etc.

It's an interesting article for perspective but somewhat inaccurate. The article fails to point out that not all Lithium batteries are the same. The Volt for example uses such a different battery chemistry that it tends not to catch on fire even when punctured. The one simulated in lab fire occurred from the battery coolant catching on fire after it had a chance to dry out. (Took about a week.) The trade off is that the Volt's battery has lower power density which means that it holds less power for a battery its size. The Tesla S uses laptop batteries which have great battery density but have the obvious trade-off of catching on fire when punctured. An Iphone uses a Lithium Polymer battery which has some of the highest energy densities of all Lithium batteries. The downside is they explode when punctured. In a small device like a phone or tablet this isn't a big deal but in a Car which this would give it some amazing range, if it crashed it would literally be a bomb on wheels.

No it is neither literally, nor figuratively a bomb on wheels. It will catch fire though, with plenty of warning and safety features, if punctured. As I understand if you were in the Tesla when it caught fire in the battery packs, you probably wouldn't burn to death.

No it is neither literally, nor figuratively a bomb on wheels. It will catch fire though, with plenty of warning and safety features, if punctured. As I understand if you were in the Tesla when it caught fire in the battery packs, you probably wouldn't burn to death.

But the comment you're replying to wasn't talking about the Tesla. It was talking about a hypothetical electric car powered by lithium polymer batteries, of the same chemistry that an iPhone uses. One of those may very well be a bomb [youtu.be] on wheels.

If a LIPO based car is a bomb on wheels with an energy density of 0.36[2]–0.875 MJ/kg, then what would you call a regular car when Gasoline has an energy density of 100 times that (~46 MJ/kg)?

Although, I guess you'd need to consider the speed at which that energy can be released, and I'm not sure how LIPOs compare on that front given that gasoline needs to be sufficiently mixed with oxygen.

I don't think that's going to happen this decade, and maybe never if there's not some fundamental discovery in battery chemistry. The Leaf has an incredibly short range and costs $29k US, even Musk is only targeting 30-40% reduction in battery (not system) costs this decade.

First off, the Model S starts at 69K.
The Model X is the Cross over that will be out early next year (was supposed to be this summer, but....). I am guessing that it will be starting at 75K.
The Model E which is out end of 2016, will be 35K base.

I'll buy one when I can get a consistently reliable 500 mile range (at -20 degrees C exterior temperature, +20 interior, with headlights on too) out of it.
Recharge at 40 to 60A (230V) at home is acceptable.
That likely means a 200 kwh battery pack. So about 2.5x increase in energy density over what we have now. This will probably be available in the next 10 years. The advantages of electric given this sort of range will all but kill other powertrains for most cars.
Those advantages will easily pay for a battery swapout every 5 years or so.

So, do not buy one. Heck, the conditions that you put on it is silly and foolish. FEW cars have 500 mile range today.
And with Telsa having FREE fast recharges (less than 1 hour for 250 MPC) around America and Europe (spaced at 100-150 miles), I think that the vast majority of buyers will become reasonable and do this instead.

This whole discussion on electric cars reminds me of digital cameras when they first came out. People act as if no technology ever improved over time. The first cameras were about 320 x 240 or so. Film purists were laughing. In order to get the same resolution as 35 mm film, you would need 5 MEGAPIXELS!!! which considering cameras were barely.1 Megapixels seemed purely ridiculous. No way is digital going to replace film! Of course the camera resolution doubled year after year and now digital cameras are ubiquitous and film is almost extinct.

EV batteries will get cheaper and more powerful over time. Range will go up, vehicle prices will go down. Economies of scale and technological progress will see to that. As they get cheaper and better, they will make more sense to more people. People who might not buy a $40k car with a 120 mile range may well buy a $25k car with a 200 mile range.

The problem is that battery technology is hardly something brand new, and there has been a nearly 50 year need (arguably perhaps even well over a century) of having reduced weight and size of batteries. Some of the very first automobiles (see the Baker Electrics [wikipedia.org] vehicle as an example) were electric even before Henry Ford started to build the Tin Lizzie. If Moore's Law applies after a fashion to battery technologies, instead of the typical assumed 2-3 year doubling/halving time that you are used to with computers, instead it is more like 25-50 years for battery technology.

There have indeed been improvements with batteries with new chemistry coming up with better ways to store a charge. None the less, progress is very slow in coming and I only expect to see perhaps another double of the capacity within the rest of my lifetime. The Lithium-ion cells that used to be in laptop computers and cell phones made it possible to build something like the Tesla Roadster (and subsequently the Model S), which is why those vehicles now have much better performance envelopes than the Baker Motor vehicles I mentioned above. A century of progress does make a difference, but it is still slow in coming.

Economies of scale will also help with the production of the Tesla vehicles, but until somebody makes the leap and builds the automobiles in the first place such economies of scale simply won't happen. Starting a brand new automobile company anywhere, much less in America, is so difficult that it really should be seen as a miracle and nearly proof there is a God all by itself. The current regulatory climate in America and Europe is bad enough that it is a miracle automobile companies even exist at all. For this reason, there is a definite lack of new entrants into the market (not that some people try, but almost all fail miserably). Tesla Motors is an exception and not a typical experience of a brand new automobile manufacturing company.

There is ONE huge difference. Back then, the companies were trying to keep their prices very high. They wanted maximum profits, which allowed other companies in. Tesla is doing the exact opposite. They have not only lowest costs, but they are keeping their prices relatively low for what they COULD charge. They are not making the profits that they could, but it will stop others from being able to take Tesla on directly.
As it is, their technology AND value is superior to all of the other car maker's offering

The $1300 Lenovo with 16gb ram, Nvidia 750 discreet video, quad core i7 cpu, and Windows 8.1 will do everything you need in a laptop and 5x more. You just aren't getting those rMBP differentiators. If they are worth an additional $1000, go for it.

A completely loaded Chevy Malibu gets you a four door sedan with turbocharged engine, full leather interior and tons of options for under $31,000. It will comfortably carry you back and forth to work for less than half the cost of the Tesla, it has more than twice the range, refilling it with energy takes five minutes, and while it is using petrochemical fuel, the Teslas - lets not kid ourselves here - are using electricity overwhelmingly generated by dirty coal fired electric plants.

No one is pretending the Lenovo Y510P laptop is a loaded rMBP, or the Chevy Malibu is the equivalent of a Tesla Model S. But the point is this - the high end Apple laptop & 27" desktop products, along with Tesla's vehicles, are - so long as they occupy their current pricing strata - going to be luxury items that a very narrow percentage of the U.S. market can afford. They will accordingly occupy a small percentage of market share.

Apple and Tesla are both destined to exist as luxury brands that will always be around, always appeal to a certain well-heeled discriminating consumer, but are fated to occupy very narrow market share. Like Rolex, Gucci, Coach hand bags, those red-soled Louboutin heels your wife / girlfriend / both have had their eyes on - they are priced outside the realm of sanity for all but enthusiasts, the foolhardy, or the very well heeled.

If Elon can scale manufacturing to produce a vehicle similar to the Nissan Leaf, improve range to 200+ miles between charges, ++ plus the quality and options a little, and get the price down into the $25-35k range while still making an acceptable profit, Tesla might have something to talk about. Until such time, Teslas sales are going to exist in a range that to companies like Ford, GM, and whatever Chrysler/Fiat is calling themselves this week - is a rounding error on just one of their models' annual sales.

Tesla sold 20some thousands Model S sedans last year? Ford sold, on average, over 50,000 F-150 pickups PER MONTH in 2013. ONE manufacturer. ONE MODEL.

I love Tesla, I admire Elon, but the numbers are just wrong for most of America.

LOL.
First off, Last year was Tesla's first year. And they borrowed.5B from the feds and paid it back.
OTOH, major car makers borrowed 10's of billions and NONE have paid it back.
Secondly, to compare the F150 to the model S is a joke. might as well compare the number of german shepards sold vs. the Model S. Same worthless comparison.
HOWEVER, in every state/nation where they have showrooms (esp. multiple showrooms), the Model S is outselling all of the direct ICE competitors, such as BWM 5 series.
And th

GM & Chrysler have fully repaid their TARP "bailout" money.http://spellchek.wordpress.com... [wordpress.com] Ford never took TARP money - they did line of credit prior to TARP's existence.

I also think you are confused about the point I was making with the Ford F-150 pickup truck. Let me make it clearer for you:I am not comparing the F150 to the Model S, or any other Tesla vehicle. What I was doing was demonstrating that Tesla is, and shall remain a sma

If Tesla can remove the battery production bottle neck it's currently facing, the only question left will be market acceptance of a mainstream electric car.

LOL. That is just funny. The Model S has won more awards than any other car. Likewise, it has nearly all reviewers raving about it. There are only a few ppl that have driven it and do not like it.
Now, they are producing at a rate of 30K cars / year, have a waiting list of 3 months in the few states that have showrooms, 3-6 months in parts Europe, and that is with less than 1/10 of the world population.
It is considered by nearly all that it is a better car that any below $150K.
In fact, it has sold more

30K is not mainstream. I bet they are operating at a huge loss with those numbers. Other cars sell in the millions in America alone, every single year.

And the average person does not read car reviews. they watch advertisements on TV, and occasionally watch news articles. Articles that have primarily been about when a new Tesla car mysteriously catches fire. 90% of everything I have heard about Tesla cars is the different ways they can and do catch fire.

Half that or less. The Ford F-Series was the top seller last year at ~700K units. The Ford explorer was rank 20 with less than 200K units sold. If any one of the tesla models manages to get into several hundred units sold annually, it will not just be mainstream but a top seller.

"last year Tesla used a bit more than one-third of the auto industry's electric-car batteries, and that was with only selling 22,477 cars. "Also, I just looked it up and it looks like in the US, last year, sold about 15.6 million new cars in 2013.

From what I understand each one of these gets a single battery in general. So that is 15.6 million batteries, by the conventional guys.Now in addition to that Tesla apparently used half again (aka 1/3 of both combined). => 7.8 million batteries.

Why even post something like that? Is uninformed cynicism what passes for a constructive comment these days?

The location of the gigafactory has not yet been announced, but Musk said it would include lots of solar and wind to power it, leading many analysts to assume somewhere in the southwest U.S., such as New Mexico.....

Why even post something like that? Is uninformed cynicism what passes for a constructive comment these days?

The location of the gigafactory has not yet been announced, but Musk said it would include lots of solar and wind to power it, leading many analysts to assume somewhere in the southwest U.S., such as New Mexico.....

Lithium is an extremely abundant element. Being No 3. on the periodic table and all, means it's one synthesised very quickly after Helium. There's lots of it in rocks - hence the name.

I'm pretty sure if the demand is there, the mining of Lithium can be ramped up to cope, and techniques to extract it that might be too expensive for small scale will be cost-effective on a large scale.

the quantities required of neodymium (for the magnets in the motors), copper (for the moving coils in the motors) and lithium (for the batteries) to push around 2 tonnes of metal is basically... insane. there's not enough available on the planet. something has to give.

1. AC Induction motors [wikipedia.org] like what are in the Tesla don't need rare earth magnets.2. There's almost certainly more copper in your house than in a Tesla.3. Besides's GrahamCox's mentioning that Lithium is actually very common, just generally widely distributed [wikipedia.org] rather than concentrated(makes mining it a bit more painful).